H. P. Lovecraft is a good example from literature. He was profoundly racist, even beyond the cultural norms of his time. However, as he has long since passed away buying and amplifying his works do not further his views and causes.
A modern counterexample would be J. K. Rowling. Where supporting her works and properties does directly contribute to furthering her prejudices in a very real way.
buying and amplifying his works do not further his views and causes
i'd rephrase that. it does not support the artist to allow him to continue spreading his views and causes, but it still draws attention to him, and potentially lets people learn about it. even this discussion here. i would not have known about lovecrafts or rowlings views if it weren't for reading about it on hackernews some time ago.
however an even more important concern is how much of these views are woven into the stories. as such it is important to at least be aware. i have ignored harry potter until now but my kids are getting interested, and so i am keeping a close eye on what they are watching for that reason.
First thing is to differentiate with how long the person is dead.
For example, when I accompanied my daughter class to a museum last year, there was a sewed reproduction of the Minotaur by Picasso (the artist exposed was a woman and this was just a collaboration she made with him). To say the least, the history behind the work is not the most glamorous. Would you explain the context to a 7 years class? But Picasso is so close in time, that his direct descendent have financial interest in exploiting the artistic legacy.
Now if you consider some artist like those who made graphic arts in Lasceau cave, of even someone as close and individually nameable as Katsushika Hokusai that died before the world wide madness of "intellectual property", that's a very different matter.
> But Picasso is so close in time, that his direct descendent have financial interest in exploiting the artistic legacy.
I wouldn't be concerned by this specifically. His relatives likely suffered from him being a jerk, I don't mind them at least benefiting from his work. I'm more concerned about Picasso being put on a pedestal.
I don't think I would be against exposing his art with the whole context though.
There can still be a moral concern if the artist is seen as a (role) model / genius and consuming / promoting their art causes the artist to be seen as a model for longer, potentially making it look like what they did is okay or forgiven given the art. We totally need a strong signal that doing good art doesn't forgive or allow being a jerk so jerks are not encouraged to take this path.
Another thing to have in mind: beside moral concerns, often, you can't separate the artist form the art because the art reflects the artist; you'd miss out on the interpretation of the art.
Sometimes the artist put too much of themselves in the work. For example: I tried reading Orson Scott Card's Iron Man comics and there was just too much homophobic nonsense throughout.
i stopped reading the ringworld series by larry niven when i found that he kept repeating how sex was used to seal a business transaction. it added nothing to the story and just seemed like wishful thinking from the author.
i can't blame them for it. it's only natural. when i write there is a lot of my personality in it too. in part that is the point and in many cases it is what makes a work worth reading. unless it makes the story unreadable like in our examples.
I read the whole series and don't remember this at all, even a single example let alone appearing so repeatedly that it became noticeable and annoying.
I'm not saying I don't believe you. Whatever it is you're talking about is probably in there.
I'm saying maybe you were just super sensitive to something that was actually insignificant.
that's possibly true. it wasn't in all of the books, but at least in the one where i stopped reading. and it was insignificant because it served no purpose in the plot. what bothered me was not the reference to sex but the fact that it made no sense in the story and that it was treated as something as casual as a handshake and it simply felt like it was the authors personal fantasy.
and if i may say so, i suspect that in general reference to sex is so common that many of us don't notice. it doesn't bother me but i simply don't care for it when it's not a significant plot element. i grew up without any exposure to this kind of theme.
